President Bush signed the country’s first new gun-control legislation in 14 years Tuesday. … President Bush signed the country’s first new gun-control legislation in 14 years Tuesday.

The law will help prevent people who are seriously mentally ill and who have a history of dangerous behavior from purchasing firearms.

The main advocates of the law, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D – N.Y., and Sen. Charles Schumer, D – N.Y., have been pushing for tougher gun-control legislation for many years.

In 2002, the double murder of a priest and parishioner in a Long Island church by a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic prompted McCarthy and Schumer to introduce bills to prevent those with severe mental illnesses from purchasing guns.

However, it wasn’t until the tragic incident at Virginia Tech last April that their efforts began to show any signs of success.

It was only after Seung-Hui Cho, a Virginia Tech student who was deemed by a judge to be “a danger to himself,” murdered 32 people with guns he should not have been able to purchase, that gun control has been gaining the attention of lawmakers.

On the one hand, the law is a major victory as it surely will help save lives in the future. On the other, it’s disgraceful that it has taken Congress so long to take action and that so many people have had to die before the law was believed to be necessary.

“Had it become law earlier,” Schumer said, according to Newsday magazine, “it may well have saved the lives” of the students at Virginia Tech.

The right to bear arms is a fundamental right originally founded to help keep Americans safe.

In order to maintain that safety, however, it’s clear that this right must also be restricted.

Those who are dangerously mentally ill, who are not in touch with the real world and who cannot rationally control their actions should not be permitted to purchase guns.

Unlike most gun control laws, the one signed Tuesday was supported by the National Rifle Association and will ultimately help strengthen gun laws by making the right to bear arms more reasonable.

In the past, certain rights and liberties have been restricted for the sake of safety. In fact, Americans seem to be more and more compliant with sacrificing certain rights and liberties for safety.

The Patriot Act, for example, is a sure sign of that, especially given Bush’s presidential victory in 2004.

At the same time, however, the language in this law must be very specific and must include the input of physicians and psychologists to determine exactly what symptoms and behaviors indicate that someone is dangerously mentally ill.

The law is not and should not be one that prohibits anyone with a mental illness from buying weapons. Rather, it should restrict those who are deemed to be a threat to the outside world and who have dangerous pasts from purchasing firearms.

Furthermore, we do not believe that gun control should go any further than this law. The past has clearly shown that this piece of legislation is vital to our safety.

Anything more may unnecessarily infringe upon our Second Amendment right.